A pretrial identification is exempt from the federal hearsay rule only if the declarant -- the person making the pretrial identification -- testifies at the trial.

Cf. United States v. Naiden, 424 F.3d 718, 722-723 (11th Cir. 2005) (upholding trial court's exclusion of defendant's statement [that he did not believe his online acquaintance to be fourteen years] as a state of mind exception....Federal Rule of Evidence 803(3) or a comparable State rule creates a hearsay exception for a statement by a declarant setting forth the declarant's perception of the declarant's internal state (including mental states, bodily conditions, feelings, motives, designs, and intentions) at the time the declarant makes the statement.

Cole v. Tansy, 926 F.2d 955, 958 (10th Cir. 1991) (upholding trial court's admission of the unidentified witness's statement against petitioner as an excited utterance because all three requirements were met:....A statement falls within the hearsay exception provided by Federal Rule of Evidence 803(2) only if the statement is related to a startling event or condition.

Croskey v. BMW of North America, Inc., 532 F.3d 511, 514 (6th Cir. 2008) (reversing judgment and remanding for new trial in automotive products liability action because "the district court erroneously ruled that evidence of similar incidents could not be used by plaintiff to prove negligence in the design...When offered in civil actions, other similar events generally do not constitute character, or propensity, and are therefore not barred by the character rule, which prohibits the use of a person's character or propensity to show that person's conduct.